GOD

[IrishEyes]

by sanctus:

It's quite surprising that you can talk almost against the god in which you believe. I f you say "I would not have invented the god of the bible" that means that you think there could be something better, but god is by definition perfect so there can be nothing better!

 

No, I don't think there could be something better. I went on further to explain that if *I* had invented *GOD*, I would have made Him more human, instead of perfect.

 

Explaining further, I would have imagined Him as imperfect, and therefore very tolerant of my imperfections. I would have invented Him as willing to accept my excuses for my mistakes, instead of demanding justice for my sins. I would not have invented an omniscient God, as I wouldn't want Him to be able to know my thoughts, feelings and motivations all the time.

 

Does that make sense? It's difficult for me to explain. Here, try it this way... if IrishEyes had invented GOD, GOD would be more of a combination of Buddha, Plato, and Chocolate Milkshake, with a little bit of U2's Bono mixed in for good measure. God would not be the all-knowing, all-seeing, ever-present, infinite, perfect GOD that He is, as there is no way for me, as a human, to ever attain what He is.

[IrishEyes]

 

by IrishEyes:

What is a BBS?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Freethinker replied:

Sorry, showing my age. Before they were called "Discussion Groups" on the Net, they were stand alone Bulletin Boards. I ran a couple myself. Many version of Discussion Group software still call themselves BBS'.

 

Showing your age? I don't think so. I think it's showing your experience!! I wish that I would have been involved in computers and WWW long ago. I know it would have made things much easier during some of my college classes, if I had access to the web and all of the information it contained. I mean, I know it was different, but still, to be involved would have been awesome. Mainly it was a very select group of the engineering and math people that were adept at www, and I was not in either of those groups. To my great benefit though, I generally pick things up pretty easily, so I'm catching up to where my LINUX loving kids are, finally!

[IrishEyes]

 

by Freethinker:

Yes, it APPEARED before my post, but I have no control over where my post appears. Anything I post in reply will be put AT THE END of ALL OTHER POSTS.

 

All you show is your continued inability to comprehend actual processes. I saw your 1st post and replied to it. It was appended to the end of the list. THEN I saw your NEXT post.

 

So once more we find that what you are SURE about often has no basis in reality.

 

I understand. That's happened to me as well. *My* solution is to now read all of the new posts before i reply to anything. As for my statement " This was posted before your tirade, so i'm sure you read it. " , it was totally uncalled for, and i apologize. If I had thought about it, I would have realized that there is no way for me to KNOW that you read it first, I just ASSUMED you read it as it directly follows the other one, and that you were attacking me for the heck of it. I've been on the defensive with you, and that is inexcusable. I haven't given you the benefit of the doubt, and that's not fair of me. I am trying to correct my attitude, and I appreciate your understanding.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: IrishEyesI do not believe (or accept) that evolution is the explanation for human life on earth. I DO believe in evolution, just not as it has been used to explain life in this discussion, and in the scientific community.

 

1)So WHICH "Evolution" do you "believe in" other than the scientific one?

 

2)What other scientific understandings that are accepted "in the scientific community" do you know better than to accept?

 

Gravity?

 

Light? (wave/ particle)

 

Medicine?

[SlinkFree]

Quotes by FreeThinker:

 

" I can see why, when someone is willing to forgo facts, they could accept any number of fairytales and myths."

 

------------------------

 

Were you not born with a childs innocence? Are you that old that you have forgotten what it is like to be inspired? Or has something seriously gone wrong in your life, that you now feel the need to destroy something that distinguished human beings from the rest of the species on this planet... the ability to hope. Look around. You talk about the problems in the world, yet your attitude is blatantly a "glass is half empty" one, Get off your *** and DO something about it instead of the rhetoric, or do you really not give a **** about humanity?

 

----------------------------------

 

"See how that works? When an Atheist/ Freethinker is shown an error in their thinking, they accept fault, admit it and move on.

 

-------------------------------------------

 

Firstly, you imply that to be an athiest IS to be a free thinker. How pathetic. You mind is so closed to the rest of existence that i find it SO hard not to laugh every time you reject other peoples claims. As i have said before, IF you were a "free thinker" you would be open to other peoples opinions. YOU ALREADY HAVE YOUR MIND MADE UP DONT YOU?

 

You have suceeded in not revealing anything about yourself to the best of my knowlege. Whether you are male/female, age, etc. If you had, perhaps you wouldnt hide behind your facade so much. I dont see this characteristic in anyone else within this forum. So, perhaps it is YOU who needs some Self-reflection, as you suggested to IrishEyes... Fortunatly you dont have to reveal anything about yourself, as I think we all have you figured out...

 

Many people in this world enjoy the feeling of destroying the beliefs of others... Is it a feeling of power that is unobtainable in your real life? What experiences in your life have made you such a pessimist? Its nothing new... YOU ARE nothing new. Perhaps if you were to enlighten us, we could all understand your position better... although, i already know what you are about to say... You dont have to proove anything to anyone right?

 

In the case that you do, and i end up eating my own words, i apologise in advance. But do us all a favour. Your position and beliefs stand just the same as a believers position does. Just because material evidence is in your favour, does NOT proove anything. How many scientific theories have previously been 'proven' flawed?

 

If truth was fully revealed in this world, we wouldn't be having this debate, and i wouldn't be getting myself frustrated with you restricted thinking... Hey! Perhaps you should consider changing your name?

 

--------------------------------

 

"... I don't BELIEVE in Evolution either. "

 

I ACCEPT Evolution because it has the greatest amount of evidence to support it as the theory that best explains the diversity of life on earth.

 

---------------------------------------

 

So in this case, do you ACCEPT the god of YOUR world to be a monster like you have previously suggested? Or are we all merely to make pleasant conversation with each other?

 

And thats just reading ONE PAGE of you comments in the last few days... Imagine what can be said about the rest? mmmmmmm...

[SlinkFree]

Quote by FreeThinker

 

"See how that works? When an Atheist/ Freethinker is shown an error in their thinking, they accept fault, admit it and move on.

 

-------------------

 

Oh Yeah... and when exactly have you taken upon this responsibility?

[SlinkFree]

Quote by Irish Eyes

 

"I understand. That's happened to me as well. *My* solution is to now read all of the new posts before i reply to anything. As for my statement " This was posted before your tirade, so i'm sure you read it. " , it was totally uncalled for, and i apologize. If I had thought about it, I would have realized that there is no way for me to KNOW that you read it first, I just ASSUMED you read it as it directly follows the other one, and that you were attacking me for the heck of it. I've been on the defensive with you, and that is inexcusable. I haven't given you the benefit of the doubt, and that's not fair of me. I am trying to correct my attitude, and I appreciate your understanding. "

 

--------------------------------

 

Many apologies IrishEyes, i dont mean to kick dirt on the above.

[IrishEyes]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally posted by: IrishEyesI do not believe (or accept) that evolution is the explanation for human life on earth. I DO believe in evolution, just not as it has been used to explain life in this discussion, and in the scientific community.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

1)So WHICH "Evolution" do you "believe in" other than the scientific one?

 

"a process of change in a certain direction".

I don't mean to imply that 'evolution' does not happen. I merely state that i do not believe/accept evolution as the explanation for human liffe on earth.

 

 

2)What other scientific understandings that are accepted "in the scientific community" do you know better than to accept? Gravity? Light? (wave/ particle) Medicine?

 

Evidently, I was not very clear in my explanation. I apologize. I did not mean to imply that there are 'other scientific understandings' that i do not accept, such as gravity, light, or medicine. My original intent was that I do not believe in the definition of evolution that has been used here in this forum, and in the scientific community, to explain human life on earth. I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. Thanks for the request to clarify.

[IrishEyes]

Many apologies IrishEyes, i dont mean to kick dirt on the above.

 

SlinkFree, your apology is appreciated, but unnecessary.

 

At one point today, I just realized how silly my actions were. I mean, I was upset because an anonymous atheist in an internet chat forum called me a liar and tried to make me look stupid. HELLOOOOOOOOOO? Who is that hurting if I spend time refuting every one of his claims? It's not hurting Freethinker, as he'll just find more ways to argue with anything that has to do with God. It's not hurting God, as He doesn't need me to defend Him, especially since I seem to be doing such a poor job, according to the responses I get from my posts. So really, it's only hurting ME. Again, I'm a Christian, not a masochist, not a martyr.

 

Please don't feel you should apologize though. My stance is that i don't feel the need to sink to the level of mudslinging and name calling, where I was earlier. Freethinker is an intelligent individual with a different opinion. His opinion is valid, as HIS opinion. if he wants to believe in evolution, that's his business.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: SlinkFree

Quotes by FreeThinker:

 

" I can see why, when someone is willing to forgo facts, they could accept any number of fairytales and myths."

 

------------------------

 

Were you not born with a childs innocence? Are you that old that you have forgotten what it is like to be inspired?

 

What does this have to do with it? Are you saying that to be inspired one has to be ignorant? That getting an education destroys inspiration? Are your posts less inspired because you have learned how to type?

 

It is this kind of mumbo jumbo that is exactly what I am talking about. You posted this thinking it was actually some wonderful attribute which is the exclusive realm of following antiquated superstitions.

 

In fact it would seem obvious that the narrow minded restrictions applied in religions would restrict the ability to promote inspiration. Religion alway has to be careful that some inspired person doesn't decide that the earth is round and circles the sun!

 

Thanks for highlighting this for us!

 

Or has something seriously gone wrong in your life,

 

Ya, OK. You missed completely the first time, above. So you now use the old line that an Atheist has to be some angry old white guy! Have you even seen Ellen, the Pres of America Athiests? She's real hot! (Ya I know, she'll be much hotter later)

 

that you now feel the need to destroy something that distinguished human beings from the rest of the species on this planet...

 

The THING that most differentiates us from all other species is our INTELLEGENCE. Religion wishes to restrict intellegence. It does not allow a fully open evaluation of everything. It places restrictions on subjects.

 

One of the main Creationist orgs requires all of the "scientists" to sign a contractual agreement that they will not pursue any research which might lead to disproving Creationism.

 

Bet you find this too much to believe right? No Scientific Org would require a contract stopping their researchers from researching some areas would they? Just because those areas might disprove them?

 

http://www.creationresearch.org/belief_wndw.htm

 

CRS Statement of Belief

 

All members must subscribe to the following statement of belief:

 

1. The Bible is the written Word of God, and because it is inspired throughout, all its assertions are historically and scientifically true in the original autographs. To the student of nature this means that the account of origins in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple historical truths.

 

2. All basic types of living things, including man, were made by direct creative acts of God during the Creation Week described in Genesis. Whatever biological changes have occurred since Creation Week have accomplished only changes within the original created kinds.

 

3. The great flood described in Genesis, commonly referred to as the Noachian Flood, was an historic event worldwide in its extent and effect.

 

4. We are an organization of Christian men and women of science who accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. The account of the special creation of Adam and Eve as one man and one woman and their subsequent fall into sin is the basis for our belief in the necessity of a Savior for all mankind. Therefore, salvation can come only through accepting Jesus Christ as our Savior.

 

No LEGITIMATE research org would EVER force such a requirement on their researchers!

 

Now you know why REAL scientists laugh at the garbage that comes out of these Churche labs. The stuff parrotted around here against Evolution comes out of this facility. It is the number one such org. No wonder they publish the stuff they do. They have already decided they will not look at anything else no matter what anyway.

 

Now tell us

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: IrishEyes

 

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html#part5

 

Thank you, Freethinker for that link. It was very informative, and actually quite interesting.

 

If people would go thru this site, there would be far fewer parrotting the stuff we see on this site. It covers virtually every attempt made by every Creationist. It does it with solid facts laid out logically. Transitional fossile records. Speciation, ... it's all covered.

 

If others don't have the time to look at the site, here's the lowdown:

 

Mr. Boxhorn goes through the many different accepted definitions of a 'species'. He explains why each one is accepted, and sometimes gives faults for each definition.

 

He goes on to explain why he uses the primary literature for each case, as opposed to reviews. This was actually very informative for me.

 

Finally, he gets to the specific speciations, and why they are or are not valid, in his opinion. For some cases, his non-validity claims are rather weak. For others, he indicates very strong arguments as to why they should not be considered speciation.

 

I am not a biologist, botanist, zoologist, entymologist, or other '-ist'. I don't even pretend to understand everything he discusses on this site. But I strongly ...

 

Originally posted by: IrishEyesdo not believe (or accept) that evolution is the explanation for human life on earth.

 

So this site put together with resources from the most highly regarded scientists in the fields of concern, filled with extensive details including a massive factual database and library is rejected with no reason provided by someone that admits they have no credentials what so ever in the field.

 

Yes, this is exactly what i keep talking about. How religion promotes intentional ignorance. Just like the psuedo-science Creation research lab. Facts, logic, they mean nothing to a believer.

 

But why come here and expect to pretend to talk science?

 

If you are going to reject out of hand ALL of the respected scientists in their field, why pretend you are interested in science?

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: SlinkFree

Firstly, you imply that to be an athiest IS to be a free thinker. How pathetic. You mind is so closed to the rest of existence that i find it SO hard not to laugh every time you reject other peoples claims.

I am familar with this approach. The specific construction of the insult. I just can't place the origin yet. (Outside of it obviously being a believer).

 

As i have said before, IF you were a "free thinker" you would be open to other peoples opinions. YOU ALREADY HAVE YOUR MIND MADE UP DONT YOU?

 

My mind is ALWAYS open to new INFORMATION.

 

So here is your chance. You obviously believe in some god myth. PROVE it is real. We are all listening.

 

Give facts and use logic though.

 

OK, we're ready...

 

go ahead...

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: IrishEyes-1-I wanted to SEE the geologic column, as I had often used it as a reference when arguing against creation. I'd studied it, but it was never explicitly explained that the geologic column does not exist intact at any point on earth. It is an abstract idea

 

You've got to remember, your information comes from this group that is NOT ALLOWED to research things.If you read research from those lacking that cross on their back (literally).

 

The Geologic Column

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/geocolumn/

This article is a detailed examination of the young earth creationist claim that the geologic column does not exist. It is shown that the entire geologic column exists in North Dakota.

 

In fact this site pretty much identifies the source of your parrotting.

 

The definition of the geologic column that I will use is the one used by Morris and Parker ( Morris, Henry M. and Gary Parker, 1987. What is Creation Science? (San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers 1987, p. 163) in the following quotation:

 

Now the geologic column is an idea, not an actual series of rock layers. Nowhere do we find the complete sequence.

 

You parrrot it well.

I read what leading scientists had to say about evolution.

No you don't, we can see who you read.

 

While many would state in a book or publication that evolution was correct, they often admitted that they were wrong later.

 

And this list is?

 

Do you want me to show you which Creation publication this came from? They don'r ptovide a valid list though. Just the CLAIMS, you so like.

 

If Darwin, as the one of the most noted evolutionists, admits that there is no proof for evolution, and many of his contemporaries also echo this statement, that presents a problem when your (MY) belief of evolution is partially based on their findings.

 

And this is how they are taught. Never checking the whole story, lest they violate their contract. Darwin wrote Origins BECAUSe he found proof. What he talked about not having is any extensive fossile records. That would be expected from the first person to assemble the concept to that point. The evidence would come as field research started. There had not been any before he suggested it needed to be researched. Where is the suprise there? The first person to invent basketball didn't have an NBA to prove it was a sport. It has taken decades to do the digs needed. And there ahve been fewer than a couple hundered EVER done! How many field research groups do you think are or have been out there? We have found an incredible amount of proof compared to the very small number of actual digs we have done.

 

-3- I think the sheer volume of things that would have to happen correctly in order for abiogenesis to be a valid explanation for the beginning of life is just not possible.

 

Your inability to comprehend is not in any way a proof of anything other than your inability to comprehend something. Simply put, in an infinite period of time, an infinite number of things will happen an infinite number of times. No matter how EXTREMELY small of a probablity something is, we are talking infitity here.

 

Or don't you accept infinity?

 

-4- Accepting certain scientific principles (HUP for example) requires an enormous amount of faith,

 

Then you had better not lift your foot or stand up ever again. Beacause you never know when that pesky theory of gravity might prove false and you will never be able to out that foot down again or sit down again! Your attempt at logic is faulty.

 

Even if it weren't. All you are showing us with EVERYTHING you have provided so far, is that you fail to comprehend the difference between an "expl

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: IrishEyes

Then there are things I do to bring glory to God, such as coordinating and leading a Meals-On-Wheels program in my church, volunteering in my church sponsored Family Resource Center to keep teenagers off the streets in my community, and preparing meals at my local homeless shelter.

There is not a single one of these things that could not be easily connected with your deriving pleasure from the activity. WHile there is no doubt many reasons for anything you do, everyone of these will provide an internal satisfaction/ reward/ positive re-inforcement. YOu can CLAIM (there it is again!) otherwise, but you PERSONALLY benefit from them.

 

I don't do any of those things for my own benefit. Does that mean that I don't enjoy them? Actually, I enjoy them a LOT. But my personal enjoyment is not my motivation. My enjoyment is a by-product of being able to bring glory to Him through my service.

 

Yada yada. Bottom line, you get endorphines from it.

 

service to God results in altruism towards others.

 

"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprize [sic], every expanded prospect." (James Madison, in a letter to William Bradford, April 1, 1774,

 

"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of [hu]mankind has preserved - the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" John Adams

 

"During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy: ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution." James Madison

 

"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after his own - a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotism." Albert Einstein

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: IrishEyes

"a process of change in a certain direction".

 

A "certain" direction? As in Evolutionary Advantage! VERY GOOD!

 

I don't mean to imply that 'evolution' does not happen.

 

This has been an intersting change. The line keeps sliding. Not long ago, most Creationists would flatly deny ANY evolution. But they saw how foolish it made them. So they slid the line alittle bit! "OK, maybe a LITTLE evolution". It's like a date. "OK, maybe up the blouse this time..." Each time a little more, The whores! :-)

 

Seriously though. Then it become MACRO-evolution that was the evil! Let's look at a few quotes. Even if you have not heard these specifically, you will recognize the speechs:

 

"The good Christian should beware of evolution and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that evolutionists have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and confine man in the bonds of Hell."

 

"What does all this worked-up enthusiasm about Dawin mean? I have never met a man yet who understands in the least what Darwin is driving at. . . I very seriously doubt that Darwin himself really knows what he is driving at. . . In a word, the outcome of this doubt and befogged speculation about Evolution is a cloak which hides the ghastly apparition of atheism."

 

Ah but wait, I am playing another trick. I wanted to show how the line works. How the religious mind always approaches science from the same angle, until they are forced, kicking and screaming, to face reality. Now the REAL quotes!

 

"The good Christian should beware of mathematicians and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and confine man in the bonds of Hell." St. Augustine

 

 

"What does all this worked-up enthusiasm about Einstein mean? I have never met a man yet who understands in the least what Einstein is driving at. . . I very seriously doubt that Einstein himself really knows what he is driving at. . . In a word, the outcome of this doubt and befogged speculation about time and space is a cloak which hides the ghastly apparition of atheism."-- William Henry, Cardinal O'Connell, 1929

 

We see throughout history, that the same approach used against Evolution has and is being used against every one of the advancements and undetandings that Science has given us.

 

2)What other scientific understandings that are accepted "in the scientific community" do you know better than to accept? Gravity? Light? (wave/ particle) Medicine?

 

Evidently, I was not very clear in my explanation. I apologize. I did not mean to imply that there are 'other scientific understandings' that i do not accept, such as gravity, light, or medicine. My original intent was that I do not believe in the definition of evolution that has been used here in this forum, and in the scientific community, to explain human life on earth. I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. Thanks for the request to clarify.

 

YOu want to dismiss the extremely well established theory of Evolution as it is well defined by the top related scientists just because you don't like it. But you do not apply the same criticism to ALL of the other findings of science. Yet none of them are as well understood, as well supported, nor as universally accepted as Evolution.

 

Your agenda is showing.

[Freethinker]

Originally posted by: IrishEyes

I was upset because an anonymous atheist in an internet chat forum called me a liar and tried to make me look stupid. HELLOOOOOOOOOO? Who is that hurting if I spend time refuting every one of his claims? It's not hurting Freethinker, as he'll just find more ways to argue with anything that has to do with God. It's not hurting God, as He doesn't need me to defend Him, especially since I seem to be doing such a poor job, according to the responses I get from my posts.

 

Ah yes, cognitive dissonense. One of my more fun toys.

[Tormod]

It's time to ask you folks to move on to new topics - this thread is now closing in on 300 posts.

 

Please consider starting new threads with other topics (and please refrain from just starting more god vs evolution threads, I think we have seen enough of it now for a while). Try to take apart your discussion and find a few ideas which might be interesting to discuss in their own.

 

To make these forums thrive we need variety, not endless circles of playing catch. And if I need to remind you folks to a) read our FAQ and B) keep in mind that this is a science and technology forum, then consider it done.

 

Tormod